‘Doomsday' killer Lori Vallow Daybell receives two more life sentences
The sentences, announced Friday, follow two separate trials in Arizona this year and bring an end to the legal cases against Vallow Day, who was convicted in Idaho in 2023 of murdering her 7-year-old son, JJ Vallow, and her daughter, Tylee Ryan, who was almost 17. She had also been found guilty of conspiring to kill Tammy Daybell, the first wife of her husband Chad Daybell. An author of self-published apocalyptic novels, Chad Daybell was convicted last year of all three murders and sentenced to death.
Prosecutors alleged that the couple justified the killings through 'doomsday' religious beliefs and bizarre ideas about cleansing 'zombie' spirits.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Justin Beresky told Vallow Daybell at her sentencing Friday that she should 'never be released from prison.'
'You've not victimized just a single victim, but many. You've shattered lives,' he said.
'The amount of contemplation, calculation, planning, manipulation that went into these crimes is unparalleled in my career,' Beresky added.
Vallow Daybell's fourth husband, Charles Vallow, was fatally shot in July 2019. The couple were estranged at the time. Vallow Daybell's brother, Alex Cox, told police that he acted in self-defense, according to records published by KUTV in Salt Lake City. Cox had not been charged in the killing before he died in December 2019.
But prosecutors said Vallow Daybell was motivated by her husband's $1 million life insurance policy and her wish to marry Chad Daybell. Adam Cox, the brother of Vallow Daybell and Alex Cox, testified during the trial that he believed his sister was behind Vallow's killing; she was convicted in April.
The second trial involved the alleged attempted murder of Brandon Boudreaux, the former husband of Vallow Daybell's niece, who was shot at from a vehicle in October 2019. His former wife, Melani Pawlowski, had been attending religious meetings with her aunt and suggested that they stockpile food for the end of the world, Boudreaux said earlier in the trial, the AP reported.
In both cases, prosecutor Treena Kay said in court Friday, Vallow Daybell 'twisted religion and fashioned it as a justification for her actions. The reality is that this defendant is the same as every other murder defendant.'
Kay argued that Vallow Daybell was motivated by money in the attack on Boudreaux, as she said it was with Charles Vallow. But in this case, the beneficiary would have been her niece.
In court Friday, Boudreaux spoke of the impact of the shooting and said he was scared to live with his children for months after he was shot at.
'The betrayal by someone connected to my family has left me battling overwhelming emotions over the years. I felt fear, paranoia,' he said. 'I lived with constant vigilance, loneliness, regret, sadness, depression, anger, heartache and embarrassment.'
Boudreaux said that he had decided to forgive Vallow Daybell but that he had 'never seen any remorse or acknowledgment from Lori or any of her conspirators.'
Vallow Daybell, who represented herself at both trials, gave a rambling statement to the court in which she did not admit any wrongdoing, saying: 'Losing those close to you is painful, and I acknowledge all of the pain and I do empathize. I feel it, too. If I was accountable for these crimes, I would acknowledge it and I would let you know how sorry I was.'
Vallow Daybell's son Colby Ryan told the court Friday that Charles Vallow 'cared for his family. He took care of our family and he made sure we had a good life. He was a very generous man.'
'Not only are my father, sister and brother gone, but so is my mother,' he said, adding that he had to 'fight to stay alive after the pain. There are no words for what I've experienced, and I had to choose to fight and stay alive'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
a minute ago
- CNN
White House monitors coverage of Epstein controversy and can't make it disappear
President Donald Trump has begged his base to stop thinking about Jeffrey Epstein. But 25 days after his Justice Department declared it had nothing more to say on the convicted sex offender, the drumbeat for action continues. Some officials acknowledge, at least privately, that the administration will have to release more information on Epstein in an attempt to quiet accusations of a coverup. Administration officials told CNN that they believe the best antidote to the intense public interest in Epstein is time. But they also acknowledge that without the release of more tangible details, the attention may never fully subside. 'Either we release more documents and it's a confirmation of suspicions, or there is some gap between what people think and what we actually have,' a White House official said. 'And you have to address it directly.' The White House has been intensely monitoring cable news and media coverage of the controversy, sources said. Since Attorney General Pam Bondi sparked public uproar by declaring that Epstein's so-called 'client list' doesn't exist, the administration has scrambled to quell the outrage by moving to interview Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell and release sealed grand jury transcripts related to both her and Epstein's criminal cases. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking and is likely one of the only living people who could shed more light on the extent of Epstein's crimes, was moved from her Florida prison to a lower-security facility in Texas on Friday. The Justice Department has not said why Maxwell was transferred. Nor has Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said anything about his two days of closed-door meetings with Maxwell, aside from promising in a statement that the DOJ would share more information about what they learned 'at the appropriate time.' Trump has not been accused of legal wrongdoing related to Epstein. The White House acknowledged but did not provide a response to a request for comment on this story. The story's staying power has partly been an issue of the president's own making. Trump is clearly frustrated by reporters who have him asked Epstein-related questions, but the small snippets of responses he does give — such as saying this week that he fell out with Epstein after the financier 'stole' a young woman, Virginia Giuffre, from working at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort — only serve to reignite the public interest and sow further questions about what Trump knew about Epstein and when. That statement shocked the family of Giuffre, who died by suicide in April. 'She wasn't stolen, she was preyed upon at his property, at President Trump's property,' Giuffre's brother Sky Roberts told CNN. A Trump administration official acknowledged the president's statements have been unhelpful in tamping down the Epstein-related furor but added they are just manifestations of his intense anger about the situation. The posture within the administration, officials said, has been to reassure the public that it is still committed to sharing more information that has been collected and reviewed by the Justice Department. But that could present another dilemma for the administration: any document dump would likely require extensive redactions to protect the identities of children who were victims of Epstein's crimes. And pages full of black ink may serve only to raise the specter of a coverup, administration officials said. The administration is also being careful not to repeat history by overpromising, which would further upset the many high-profile figures in the president's base who have expressed their frustration over the issue. 'The frenzy and criticism we saw has abated somewhat since the first two weeks. That's in large part thanks to the administration making clear this isn't cased closed like they initially said,' a person close to Trump told CNN. 'But the idea that this can be buried, or will go away thanks to some bigger news story, is a fantasy,' this person said. 'Even if a news story sucks up the oxygen for a time, it will pop up again. It won't die until people get some real answers.' Friday was a prime example of the issue popping back up with Maxwell's surprise transfer. And there will be more court filings next week. In theory, August could bring some relief to an aspect of the Epstein news cycle with Congress on recess for the month, limiting actions from Democrats to force Republicans to take a public stand on the matter. And an attempt by House Republicans to interview Maxwell has failed for now. Maxwell made a list of demands, including requesting immunity and to be provided with a list of questions in advance. The House Oversight Committee on Friday rejected those demands. It did agree, however, to delay any deposition until after the Supreme Court weighs her pending appeal, which won't happen until the end of September. Meanwhile, while officials believe Trump's directive to Bondi to move to unseal grand jury transcripts related to the investigations of Epstein and Maxwell, as well as the Justice Department's interview of Maxwell in prison, are steps in the right direction, multiple people inside and outside of the administration maintain there's still recognition that the fury around Epstein will not abide until more substantial material is released. The limits of that information are well-established. For instance, the grand jury transcripts the Justice Department is asking to unseal from its investigation include testimony from only two witnesses, both law enforcement officials, according to a DOJ memo submitted this week. In an order Thursday evening, federal Judge Richard Berman asked for more information from the government regarding their motion to unseal grand jury transcripts from Epstein's case. Berman made several requests, including verifying the dates of all grand jury presentations in the case, providing exhibits shown to grand jurors and stating whether the government wants exhibits unsealed in addition to transcripts. Those answers are due Monday. Tuesday, meanwhile, is the deadline for Epstein's victims and Maxwell to respond to the DOJ's request to release grand jury files. The judge then has pledged to rule quickly. In the White House's version of a perfect world, the American people would be celebrating Trump's trade war successes, the record-low number of migrants crossing the southern border or the renewal of a society that is being shaped to the president's expansive vision. That may happen, but the Epstein story will remain no matter what. 'There is an acknowledgement that this isn't just going to go away,' one White House official told CNN. CNN's Annie Grayer and Casey Gannon contributed to this report.
Fox News
2 minutes ago
- Fox News
At least 4 dead in Montana bar shooting
Authorities are investigating after at least four people were killed in Anaconda, Montana. (Credit: KTMF)
Associated Press
2 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Columbia Sportswear sues Columbia University, alleging merchandise too similar and causes confusion
NEW YORK (AP) — For decades, T-shirts, sweatshirts and other clothing under the Columbia Sportswear brand and clothing emblazoned with the Columbia University name coexisted more or less peacefully without confusion. But now, the Portland-based outdoor retailer has sued the New York-based university over alleged trademark infringement and a breach of contract, among other charges. It claims that the university's merchandise looks too similar to what's being sold at more than 800 retail locations including more than 150 of its branded stores as well as its website and third-party marketplaces. In a lawsuit filed July 23 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, Columbia Sportswear, whose roots date back to 1938, alleges that the university intentionally violated an agreement the parties signed on June 13, 2023. That agreement dictated how the university could use the word 'Columbia' on its own apparel. As part of the pact, the university could feature 'Columbia' on its merchandise provided that the name included a recognizable school insignia or its mascot, the word 'university,' the name of the academic department or the founding year of the university — 1754 — or a combination. But Columbia Sportswear alleges the university breached the agreement a little more than a year later, with the company noticing several garments without any of the school logos being sold at the Columbia University online store. Many of the garments feature a bright blue color that is 'confusingly similar' to the blue color that has long been associated with Columbia Sportswear, the suit alleged. The lawsuit offered photos of some of the Columbia University items that say only Columbia. 'The likelihood of deception, confusion, and mistake engendered by the university's misappropriation and misuse of the Columbia name is causing irreparable harm to the brand and goodwill symbolized by Columbia Sportswear's registered mark Columbia and the reputation for quality it embodies,' the lawsuit alleged. The lawsuit comes at a time when Columbia University has been threatened with the potential loss of billions of dollars in government support. Last week, Columbia University reached a deal with the Trump administration to pay more than $220 million to the federal government to restore federal research money that was canceled in the name of combating antisemitism on campus. Under the agreement, the Ivy League school will pay a $200 million settlement over three years, the university said. Columbia Sportswear aims to stop all sales of clothing that violate the agreement, recall any products already sold and donate any remaining merchandise to charity. Columbia Sportswear is also seeking three times the amount of actual damages determined by a jury. Neither Columbia Sportswear or Columbia University couldn't be immediately reached for comment.
